Recurring concern
Inadequate speed control at hazardous road locations
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 3 Feb 2014•Latest report 26 Mar 2026
What this concern includes
Includes speed-limit setting, warnings, placement and traffic-calming controls specifically tied to hazardous junctions, bends, crossings, bridges or comparable road locations.
Not included
- General speeding enforcement without an identified hazardous road location
- Road-design hazards for which vehicle-speed control is not the identified deficient control
- Reports
- 46
- Individual concerns
- 51
- Date range
- 2014–2026
- Stated actions
- 58
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Insufficient speed-limit signage warning approaching traffic of the bend
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Appraise safe siting and trigger speed for a vehicle-activated flashing bend-warning sign for southbound traffic.
Stated by West Sussex County Council -
Action
Install a vehicle-activated flashing bend-warning sign for southbound traffic north of the bend.
Stated by West Sussex County Council -
Action
Provide an additional bend-warning sign with a “Reduce speed now” supplementary plate.
Stated by West Sussex County Council
-
Action
Reduce the speed limit from 40mph to 30mph and install a vehicle-activated speed-warning sign near the village school.
Stated by West Sussex County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing 30mph signs and road markings are considered sufficient to alert drivers to the speed limit.
Stated by West Sussex County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Application of the national speed limit on the village section failing to provide safe pedestrian crossing conditions
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Review the speed limit, street lighting, pedestrian crossing safety and underpass signing at the Backbarrow A590 location.
Stated by National Highways
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
The existing 60 mph national speed limit is considered appropriate and consistent with current guidance for this stretch of the A590.
Stated by National Highways
-
Concerns raised1
Speed cushion failing to require vehicles to slow down
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Reconstruct speed cushions near the two pedestrian refuge crossing points adjacent to Mayow Park.
Stated by London Borough of Lewisham
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Financial constraints mean widespread renewal of worn traffic-calming features is not feasible; only cushions near the crossings will be reconstructed.
Stated by London Borough of Lewisham
-
Concerns raised1
Fatal road traffic collision hazard at the site despite a 50 mph speed limit
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Complete prioritisation and short-listing of casualty-reduction schemes for the A446 site and decide the outcome by the end of September.
Stated by Warwickshire County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
-
Position
No immediate highway safety actions were considered necessary following the post-collision site inspection.
Stated by Warwickshire County Council
-
Position
Finite casualty-reduction funding and prioritisation requirements prevent commitment to a scheme before the shortlisting process is complete.
Stated by Warwickshire County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Failure of the current speed limit to provide an appropriately low speed for restricted visibility at the bridge
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to control excessive vehicle speeds on Barrack Road
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised2
Failure to implement maximum-speed road signs for the bend
Failure to implement slow painted markings on both approaches to the bend
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Inappropriateness of a 60 mile per hour speed limit on a single carriageway road
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Review the appropriateness of the 60 mph speed limit at the location.
Stated by Cumbria County Council
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Changes to the speed limit cannot be completed immediately because consultation and legal processes will take at least six months.
Stated by Cumbria County Council
-
Concerns raised1
Speed limit increase before the pedestrian crossing
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to ensure review of maximum vehicle speed following accident-history signage
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
Data last updated 7 September 2026